Well said, it's intellectually absurd to link 9/11 Truth to fascism except to say there is no link (IMHO).

To the OP, what was the reaction to 9/11 in the US, find the enemy and destroy them, was it not?

Nevermind the reaction after 911. I admit, when I accepted the official story I had a similiar semitment as everyone else until about 2006. Far more
telling is the reaction to the raid through commandos in Pakistan. Its even worse when the only bodies we have pictures of are not those of Bin Laden
and the fact that there was a possibility to apprehend the residents alive, because they had no time to put up a firefight contrary to initial claims.

Imagine if foreign commandos killed an enemy of the state to a country other than the us in America, with big media attention.

Originally posted by Cassius666
Imagine if foreign commandos killed an enemy of the state to a country other than the us in America, with big media attention.

I don't think you'll have a particularly hard job convincing anyone that US Government policy is lopsided and hypocritical a lot of the time.

I don't know of any 'truster' or 'official story supporter' or 'debunker' (seriously just use that, nobody has a problem with it) that would
claim such a thing. I've met one or two who were a little hyper-patriotic, but that's about it, the rest are pretty critical and I don't know any
who trust the US Government without limit.

No you were not talking about that at all. You were talking about 911 truthers having a desire to round up minorities, when it were are the truthers
who do not buy in the muslim conspiracy.
You were talking about truthers having violent revenge fantasies when it were the 911 deniers who cheered the bloodied pics and news of the invasions
and later of the assasinations in pakistan.

But I can give you several dozen examples from this forum in just the last few months of Truthers advocating 'hangings' and similar violence against
the minority of "internationalists" that they think are oppressing them. Can you not see that this is just the sort of language the Nazis used?

And I doubt you can show me one example of a 9/11 "denier" on this forum who "cheered the bloodied pics and news of the invasions and later of the
assasinations in pakistan". If you can I invite you to do so.

Exactly. Truthers routinely characterise debunkers as unthinking patriots when I've only seen a very few who are.

Actually I think Truthers tend to be further to the right, and in fact more nationalist, in that they think the US is a wonderful utopia hijacked by a
minority of evil people.

I dont see anything that might hint to that connotation of yours. Once again it is not the truthers who see america as some kind of utopia, but the
deniers. Truthers from what I have read have no illusions about americans being better or worse than people elsewhere especially in regards with the
people in power.

Your "observations" literally read as if you just flipped 911 deniers with truthers.

I think we can all agree that the op shot himself with this thread in the foot seen as it can be easily shown that the points he tries to smear
truthers with, not only are not true for truthers and that truthers tend to be more liekely to have an antagonistic view to what the op claims the
attitude of truthers is, but it is also very obvius, that the points he tries to attribute to truthers are more in line with the thinking and
Weltanschaung of the deniers.

I just find it ironic that if the 9/11 commission or NIST released information of such horrifyingly bad quality so blatantly like the truthers are
doing, they'd be pouncing on them like Whitney Houson on a row of coc aine. Double standards, anyone?

The 9/11 commission and NIST have both released information that meets the definition of "bunk". The commission cherry-picked what info they
included and ignored testimony and events that did not fit the party line (WTC 7 anyone?). Interestingly, commission members are now making
statements about the quality of the report. They are also making statements about the military lying to them. The NIST report is just plain
laughable and appears to be some kind of bad joke. The fact that you mention both of these docs in a positive light raises red flags for me.

As far as the the 9/11 truth movement -- it is not monolithic. There are significant quantities of bad info and unbelievable levels of disinfo. I'm
convinced the government is behind some of that disinfo (i.e. pentagon pledges to "fight the net"). But ..... there are several groups that are
working in a professional manner to find the truth. Suppose you show me anything inconsistent with the facts on ae911truth.org?

Exactly. Truthers routinely characterise debunkers as unthinking patriots when I've only seen a very few who are.

Actually I think Truthers tend to be further to the right, and in fact more nationalist, in that they think the US is a wonderful utopia hijacked by a
minority of evil people.

I dont see anything that might hint to that connotation of yours. Once again it is not the truthers who see america as some kind of utopia, but the
deniers. Truthers from what I have read have no illusions about americans being better or worse than people elsewhere especially in regards with the
people in power.

Your "observations" literally read as if you just flipped 911 deniers with truthers.

I think we can all agree that the op shot himself with this thread in the foot seen as it can be easily shown that the points he tries to smear
truthers with, not only are not true for truthers and that truthers tend to be more liekely to have an antagonistic view to what the op claims the
attitude of truthers is, but it is also very obvius, that the points he tries to attribute to truthers are more in line with the thinking and
Weltanschaung of the deniers.

I am sure the thought that WTC 7 was brought down with explosives made him enraged and dangerous.

But wait there is more

As always, people can read through the tread and make their own conclusion. I also want to point out that the predictions of some of the 911 deniers,
that the truthers will go crazy and resort to racial slurs and deathreats in this thread to make their case did not come true. AGAIN !

Originally posted by Cassius666
Or did you guys forget about this guy?

I'm not sure who you're replying to, you seem to be quoting yourself. Are you suggesting that racist, non forum members who murder people somehow
connect to forum member behaviour? I don't understand.

Originally posted by Cassius666
I also want to point out that the predictions of some of the 911 deniers, that the truthers will go crazy and resort to racial slurs and deathreats in
this thread to make their case did not come true. AGAIN !

Literally two posts above yours:

Originally posted by 4hero
There's a lot of traiters in this thread that need to be rounded up and got rid of!

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I was just wondering if anyone could think of an example from history where people have believed that a country's (or the world's) ills could be cured
by rounding up a secretive, manipulative minority and killing them?

This is what happened in France,Russia and Germany. Its not the best idea. It takes away from your good intentions.

"Not the best idea" is a value judgment.

Consider France. Long term: the red terror of the French Revolution -- killing the royals and the elite -- put France on a completely different path
in history. Short term: it addressed the excesses and crimes of the ruling class.

The big problem today is that the 9/11 perps are totally protected by state/corporate media, police and the military. Without a firm understanding of
the command structure and events, the best thing we can do is guess. Given the importance of 9/11 in perverting our government and the
millions murdered overseas, I think it would be beneficial to round up the major suspects and take them to isolation cells in Gitmo. They
should be water boarded until we can produce an interlocking narrative of the facts.

Originally posted by 4hero
Dont take stuff to heart! This is a forum after all! It was a joke, but maybe you cannot take a joke!

I was referring to the fact that there is a lot of disinfo and people pushing it do need to be removed from the site.
Chill out, grab some tissues, wipe your eyes, carry on....

Didn't seem that funny to me to be honest.

I've kinda lost count of the different types of info that are mentioned on here. 'Disinfo' is people paid to post things right? and 'Misinfo' is
people who mistakenly post info? Some people seem to use them both to mean 'people who are paid off'. Do you think there are any genuine
'debunkers' or is everyone paid off?

The intentional misspelling to mock one of the other threads which had the same misspelling and the intention to poke fun at it was obvious to me and
to you. You just choosed to spin it your way. "This is so much of a threat I had to report it". Give me a break. You knew exactpy where he was going
with it I know this because your IQ is at the very least sufficient to type and to operate a computer. Nowhere did it say this forum. A bunch of stuff
was said that is not true for one group of people, but is very true for another group of people.

Those who are potentially dangerous and a threat and prejudiced because of their views of 911 are the deniers not the truthers. Your grasping at
straws is pretty much akin to admitting defeat.

I was referring to the fact that there is a lot of disinfo and people pushing it do need to be removed from the site.
Chill out, grab some tissues, wipe your eyes, carry on....

Didn't seem that funny to me to be honest.

I've kinda lost count of the different types of info that are mentioned on here. 'Disinfo' is people paid to post things right? and 'Misinfo' is
people who mistakenly post info? Some people seem to use them both to mean 'people who are paid off'. Do you think there are any genuine
'debunkers' or is everyone paid off?

Just trying to get my bearings because it's hard to tell!

I think there is a lot of naive OS'ers who try and debunk stuff before doing any research, and then they are others that are professional debunkers
that are paid to spread disinfo, but that is just my opinion.

Originally posted by Cassius666
it was obvious to me and to you. You just choosed to spin it your way. "This is so much of a threat I had to report it". Give me a break. You knew
exactpy where he was going with it I know this because your IQ is at the very least sufficient to type and to operate a computer. Nowhere did it say
this forum. A bunch of stuff was said that is not true for one group of people, but is very true for another group of people.

It might have been a joke, but at the time it didn't read much like one. You can ask the mods to confirm I reported it before I posted if you
like.
...

Your grasping at straws is pretty much akin to admitting defeat.

edit on 26-5-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

I don't even know what you're saying here. I've never spoken to you before and you're already claiming I'm 'defeated'. What are you even
talking about?

Originally posted by 4hero
I think there is a lot of naive OS'ers who try and debunk stuff before doing any research, and then they are others that are professional debunkers
that are paid to spread disinfo, but that is just my opinion.

Sure, I hear this a lot. But then I also hear that people like Judy Wood are 'deliberate misinformation'. Is that like 'disinfo'? It all seems to
be a big mess where it's just used to accuse people who disagree with whatever someone's saying at the time.

Is there any way you can tell who's being honest and who's being paid? I mean in this thread I've already been accused of inappropriate things,
despite not posting for a year and just asking questions! It seems some people are pretty quick on that trigger!

as far as I know, exponent, no evidence has ever been presented that any ATS posters are genuinely "paid shills". It's a surprisingly common meme
on the internet, though, wherever people hold controversial views and are beset by critics, there are accusations that the critics are paid to disrupt
the conversation.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.